Greenhouse Gas Intensity of LNG as Fuel

Transcription

1 Greenhouse Gas Intensity of LNG as Fuel NGVA-thinkstep - Study Results Dr. Oliver Schuller thinkstep AG Royal Netherlands Society of Engineers, Oil & Gas Technology, December 2017

2 Agenda 1. About thinkstep 2. Motivation 3. Scope and Methodology 4. Results 5. Lessons Learned and Key Findings 2

3 About thinkstep Sustainability Consulting, Software and Data thinkstep enables organizations worldwide to succeed sustainably. Our industry-leading software, data and consulting services help businesses drive operational excellence, product innovation, brand value and regulatory compliance. 3

4 About thinkstep Competencies * BOM = Bill of Material; CPM = Compliance Process Manager; IMM = Integrated Material Management 4

5 About thinkstep Professional Consulting Services Strategic Planning Sustainability Strategy Development thinkstepgo Workshop Materiality Assessment Benchmarking Vision, Focus areas and target setting Governance and policies Business Value of Sustainability Sustainable Solution Steering Performance Improvement Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) Product Environmental Footprinting (PEF) Corporate Environmental Footprinting Product Portfolio Improvement (Eco-Design) Energy Management (EN 16247, ISO 50001) Environmental Management (ISO 14001, EMAS) Sustainable Supply Chain Management (SSCM) Communication Environmental Product Declaration (EPD) Environmental Health Declaration (HPD) GRI-Reporting CDP-Reporting Green Building Certification (DGNB, LEED, BREEAM) Stakeholder Engagement 5

6 2,000 Customers 6

7 Motivation 7

8 Motivation Roadmap of Road Transport Road transport system is asked to move from the current oil derived monopoly towards a more complex system composed by different propulsion systems, based on both Internal Combustion Engines and Electrified powertrains. Those systems should rely on different forms of energies, produced with very different processes, incl. primary energy sources. Source: Roadmap of road transport energy towards 2040, ERTRAC, June 2016 When referring to decarbonisation, it is fundamental to consider the entire fuel chain (from extraction to its end usage, meaning from Well-to-Wheel) to have a proper comparison among different solutions. In this way technology neutrality is guaranteed. 8

9 Motivation Why a new study? The gas industry is increasingly challenged in the EU on how the greenhouse gas intensity (GHG) of NG compares with other fuels. This topic will be a key point under the review of the Fuel Quality Directive which will, inter alia, set the default values of fuels used in transport. Accurate, updated and reliable GHG inventory data is key to understand the current benefits, as well as the future potential for supporting Europe s activities in developing a strategic vision for a real sustainable mobility. 9

10 NGVA-thinkstep GHG Intensity study Partners NGVA Europe, supported through a partnership of 27 industry organisations, commissioned an industry-wide analysis of the supply and use of natural gas in Europe. More than 50 companies provided data. The study covers road vehicles (Well-to- Wheel), maritime vessels (Well-to-Wake) and power generation (Well-to-Grid). This is a deep and exhaustive analysis of the current state and an outlook to 2030 about the natural gas supply chain, natural gas vehicles (NGVs) and shipping vessels performance. 10

11 Scope and Methodology 11

12 What does Greenhouse Gas Intensity mean? Life Cycle Thinking Life Cycle Impact Assessment Environmental impacts e.g. Climate Change Emissions Life Cycle Inventory Resources Life Cycle Phases Production Processing Transport Usage End-of-life Source: thinkstep,

13 Scope and Methodology Geographical boundaries and critical review The analysis was performed for four EU regions, corresponding to the Exergia study. The LCA software system GaBi is used to synthesise the collected data and information and to build the basis for the GHG model. The study is subject to critical review by a panel of independent experts according to ISO Source: NGVA Europe,

14 Scope and Methodology System boundaries Pipeline supply chain LNG supply chains Production & Processing Pipeline Transport Purification Production & Processing Pipeline Transport Transmission & Storage Distribution (gas) Dispensing (gas) Liquefaction LNG Transport LNG Terminal (Regas.) Distribution (liquid) Dispensing (liquid) CNG, in tank LNG, in tank 14

15 Scope and Methodology CNG supply chain System boundaries CNG supply chain Production & Processing Pipeline Transport Purification Production & Processing Pipeline Transport Transmission & Storage Liquefaction LNG Transport LNG Terminal (Regas.) Distribution (gas) Dispensing (gas) CNG, in tank 15

16 Scope and Methodology LNG supply chain LNG supply chain System boundaries Production & Processing Pipeline Transport Purification Liquefaction LNG Transport LNG Terminal Distribution (liquid) Dispensing (liquid) LNG, in tank 16

17 Scope and Methodology System boundaries Source: thinkstep,

18 Scope and Methodology Included and excluded elements or activities Included Excluded Well drilling and well installation Seismic exploration and exploratory drilling Production & processing (CO 2 removal, water removal, H 2 S removal) Maintenance efforts for infrastructure (e.g., pipeline, LNG carriers, liquefaction plants) Pipeline transport Auxiliary materials, like lubricants Purification Overhead of production plants, e.g., personnel lodging and transport, employee commute, administration Liquefaction Accidents LNG transport LNG terminals (Regasification) Transmission & Storage Distribution (CNG and LNG) Dispensing (CNG and LNG) Energy supply: gas turbine, gas engines, diesel generators, grid electricity Methane emissions Consideration of co-products (crude oil, NGLs, LPG) Life cycle burdens of infrastructure (e.g., pipelines, LNG carriers, liquefaction plants, etc.) Source: thinkstep 18

19 Natural gas supply Total EU CNG and LNG consumption mix used in the study Natural Gas Consumption Mix for EU Total Germany 1.9% Denmark 1.0% Algeria 5.9% Algeria LNG 2.2% LNG Consumption Mix for EU Total Algeria LNG 22.1% UK 9.1% Romania 2.4% Russia 30.8% Netherlands 11.7% Hungary 0.4% Italy 1.5% Libya 1.7% Nigeria LNG 1.5% Qatar LNG 56.0% Nigeria LNG 14.6% Qatar LNG 5.6% Poland 1.3% Norway LNG 0.7% Norway 22.4% Norway LNG 7.3% - For 90.3% primary data are collected (i.e. 8 countries) - For 8.3% literature data were used (i.e. 6 countries) - 1.4% were neglected and the remaining mix scaled to 100% - For 95.2% primary data are collected (i.e. 4 countries) - 4.8% were neglected and the remaining mix scaled to 100% Source: Own calculations based on IEA Natural Gas mix 2015p, Copyright (c) (2016) thinkstep AG All rights reserved 19

20 EU-28 LNG supply Imports to Europe Snohvit, Norway Norway the Netherlands UK Germany Bovanenkovskoye, Russia Bonny, Nigeria Ras Laffan, Qatar Arzew / Skikda, Algeria Transport by LNG carrier Transport by pipeline Source: thinkstep 20

21 EU-28 LNG supply GaBi Screenshot On/Offshore Oil/Gas Field, (conv. and unconv. technology) Pipeline with Compressors LNG Terminal LNG Vessel LNG Terminal Natural Gas to Transmission Network Production & Processing Pipeline Transport Purification and Liquefaction LNG Transport Regasification Transmission & Distribution Each box represented a stage/process in the life cycle Source: thinkstep,

22 EU-28 CNG supply GaBi Screenshot Source: thinkstep,

23 EU-28 LNG supply Qatar: Production & Processing and Pipeline Transport 23

24 EU-28 LNG supply Qatar: Purification and Liquefaction 24

25 EU-28 LNG supply Qatar: LNG Transport The share of the LNG carriers by vessel is based on GIIGNL and IGU. The shortest route for the maritime LNG transportation from Qatar to Europe is considered, i.e., through the Suez Canal, since Q Flex are able to pass the canal. 25

26 EU-28 LNG supply LNG carrier fuel consumption (LHV) and methane emissions All fuel consumption values are based on round-trip considerations per km, i.e., 0.5 km laden and 0.5 km ballast shipping. The data also considers that 93 % of the LNG is unloaded. The remaining 7 % stays in the vessel. The data are taken from thinkstep s GaBi databases crosschecked with literature and were considered good proxies for LNG transport by representatives of ENGIE and Shell. 26

27 EU-28 LNG supply LNG Terminals The inventory data are based on information from 10 data providers covering 15 LNG terminals out of 21 in operation in Europe. The 15 terminals were identified to be representative for Europe. 27

28 EU-28 LNG supply LNG Distribution and Dispensing LNG Distribution performed by a 44 tonnes long haul diesel fuelled truck with 16.5 tonnes payload capacity. The average distance from the terminal to the filling station was assessed to be ~200 km (one way). LNG Dispensing The modelled station is equipped with boil-off gas (BOG) treatment. LNG dispensing data were provided by GrDF and are based on averaged industry data for the year In addition, the data were discussed with industry experts of the NGVA and Shell and are considered as technology representative industry average. 28

29 Results 29

30 Well-to-Tank (GHG) emissions CNG Well-to-Tank - CNG, in tank - GHG (EU Total) [g CO 2 -eq/mj] Well-to-Tank GHG Emissions: CNG supply Breakdown by main individual emissions per region EXERGIA 19.2 EU West JEC-WtW 13.0 EU South East EU Central NGVA 12.5 EU North EU Total Source: Exergia (2015), JEC (2014) [g CO2-eq/MJ (LHV)], in tank Fuel dispensing Gas transmission, storage and distribution Feedstock transportation (Pipeline, LNG carrier) Gas production, processing and liquefaction Well-to-Tank GHG Emissions: CNG supply breakdown by main individual emissions CO2 CH4 N Well-to-Tank CNG, in tank - Methane Emissions

31 Well-to-Tank (GHG) emissions LNG Well-to-Tank - LNG, in tank - GHG (EU Total) [g CO 2 -eq/mj] EXERGIA JEC-WtW NGVA NGVA (Scenario Algeria) EU Central Well-to-Tank GHG Emissions: LNG supply Breakdown by main individual emissions per region EU West EU South East EU North EU Total [g CO2-eq/MJ (LHV)], in tank Well-to-Tank GHG Emissions: LNG supply breakdown by main individual emissions Fuel dispensing Gas transmission, storage and distribution Feedstock transportation (Pipeline, LNG carrier) Gas production, processing and liquefaction CO2 CH4 N Well-to-Tank - LNG, in tank - Methane Emissions Note: LNG distribution is incl. in fuel dispensing

32 Well-to-Wheel (GHG) emissions Passenger Vehicles Well-to-Wheel - Passenger Vehicles - GHG Intensity [g CO 2 -eq/km] Petrol (FQD) 169 Diesel (FQD) 140 CNG -7% % Vehicle from the C-segment being used according to the New European Driving Cycle Benefits and reduced GHG emissions from passenger cars are possible with CNG. 32

33 Well-to-Wheel (GHG) emissions Heavy-Duty Vehicles Well-to-Wheel - Heavy-Duty Vehicles - GHG Intensity [g CO 2 -eq/km] Diesel (FQD) 1074 HPDI (LNG) % SI (LNG) % SI (CNG) % t tractor + trailer combination with 75% payload in long haul use For long-haul missions, both CNG and LNG are having lower emissions compared with diesel. 33

34 Well-to-Wheel (GHG) emissions Ships Well-to-Wake - Ships - GHG Intensity [g CO 2 -eq/kwh] at 85 % load MDO (FQD) HFO (JEC-WtW) Dual-fuel [4-stroke] Dual-fuel [2-stroke] % -21% The benchmark for maritime comparison here is Heavy-Fuel Oil, results from JEC. In maritime applications, the use of LNG provides a clear Well-to-Wake benefit compared with petroleum based fuels. 34

35 Well-to-Wheel (GHG) emissions Renewable gas Well-to-Wheel - Passenger Vehicles - GHG Intensity [g CO 2 -eq/km] Petrol (FQD) 169 Diesel (FQD) 140 CNG CNG (10% biocng, 10% SNG) % -36% bio CNG (100%) 30-82% Renewable gas has the key property to be 100% compatible with natural gas, being easily blended or used directly as a neat fuel in engines Locally produced Renewable gas represents a fast drive towards decarbonisation 35

36 Well-to-Wheel (GHG) emissions Passenger Vehicle GHG by Contributors WtW - Passenger Vehicle - GHG by Contributors [g CO2-eq/km] (94%) 7.7 (5.9%)0.6 (0.5%) CNG CO2 CH4 N20 On both CNG and LNG applications no leakage is admitted at vehicle level. CH 4 emissions are generated as unburned hydrocarbon at the exhaust and considered as CO 2 equivalent. 36

37 Lessons learnt 37

38 Lessons Learned Key Findings GHG studies give valuable insights in the whole natural gas (NG) supply chain GHG emissions of the NG supply chains to Europe differ by region/country. Country of origin and technology used for production, processing, transport does matter as well as methane emissions Standardised environmental analysis (ISO 14044) is key to support EU goals Results were confirmed by three independent experts Uncertainty of results can be reduced by collecting most accurate data. These will increase validity of results Good data quality is key! CNG and LNG fuelled transport is having benefits and lower emissions than conventional fuels. 38

39 Recommendations Take away 1. Well-to-Wheel GHG emissions must be taken into account when comparing vehicles. This is the main way to achieve true technology neutrality. 2. NGVs must be acknowledged as a solution to ensure improved air quality (NOx, PM) in a cost efficient way. 3. Continuous development of CNG and LNG infrastructure to further reduce footprint. 4. Company specific supply chains may differ from the average Perform your own analyses lower your risks, reduce costs, increase revenue and enhance your brand! 5. Read more: Full report available under: 39

40 Your contact at thinkstep AG Hauptstraße Leinfelden-Echterdingen Germany Phone: Fax: Dr. Oliver Schuller Principal Consultant Team Lead Energy and Oil & Gas Copyright (c) (2017) thinkstep AG All rights reserved Phone